Plan to map out natural resources

Plan to map out natural resources

By Indra Darmawan

JAKARTA (JP): October and November were among the busiest
months in the year 2000 for the House of Representatives (DPR).
Extensive sessions were held for executives and legislators to
discuss and finally approve laws on the national development plan
(Propenas).

The schedule was hectic largely because the annual development
plan (Repeta-yearly breakdown of Propenas) and annual budget for
2001 (APBN) were also in the pipeline at almost the same time and
the schedule overlapped.

In the past, the usual time allocation for this kind of
activity was stretched out over a year with clear sequences and
an ample schedule. All's done now.

The government officially submitted the draft of Propenas in
October and began the long process of deliberation in DPR. Before
it was submitted to DPR, the draft had been circulated to various
parties, mostly to central ministries, regional governments, and
universities, to obtain feedback. The government even staged a
"road show" in selected provinces.

The draft chapter on natural resources and environmental
management contained background on major issues, national policy
directions, proposed development programs and a matrix of
policies.

Twelve chapters in Propenas covered all development sectors
such as economics, politics, law and order, regional government,
religion, education, social welfare as well as natural resources
development and environmental management.

Does Propenas differ from the old practice of Repelita and
Sarlita during the New Order regime? Does it shed new light and
hope for better planning formulation?

The government and DPR have been doing this since the
beginning of the first Repelita (Five-year Development Plan) in
1969. Nevertheless, this time, the DPR is in a far better
bargaining position with stronger authority and greater self-
confidence, though not always smarter, compared to the
government.

The discussions often came to a near deadlock especially in
the smaller and intensive working group sessions. In addition,
special sessions were held to lobby and seek compromise on
disputed issues such as the level of BPPN's asset recovery rate.

However, the discussion on the natural resources and
environmental management chapter went relatively smoothly without
major revisions. Perhaps both the government and DPR were
exhausted after engaging in heated discussion on earlier chapters
on the national economic and political development plan, or
perhaps they were not interested in this "unpopular" issue.

My observation seems to suggest that the DPR members did not
have sufficient information and knowledge on the matter.

In the sub-chapter 'background of major issues', five major
issues were addressed, namely:

(1) the importance of local and adat (indigenous) people in
the management of natural resources;

(2) gradual transfer of authority in natural resources
management to local administration;

(3) people's control, accountability, and law enforcement in
natural resources management;

(4) the problems of increasing post-crisis poverty rate,
combined with poor law enforcement, which have already caused
destruction to the environment (i.e. illegal logging and
encroachment of protected forests); and

(5) the adverse impact of excessive industrialization on
environment quality.

Each issue is equally important, elaborated upon in short and
concise paragraphs. One can see that these identify several
problems related to the natural resources development and
environmental management and are mostly concerned with the
practices during the New Order era (1966-1998).

The draft confirmed the management of natural resources in the
past was a short-sighted venture and focused on exploiting
natural resources to gain foreign reserves to support high
economic growth. This was done without adequate attention (and
compensation) to the welfare of those living in and around
locations of natural resources, and who were directly affected by
the exploitation.

The draft also "confessed" that the exploitation of natural
resources was in fact only benefiting certain people and certain
groups. Indirectly, it also recommended that the government's
record of achievements in natural resources and environmental
management had been grim.

Based on those major issues, policy directions were spelled
out clearly to deal with each problem. They contained, however,
mostly similar standard actions usually found in the New Order's
Repelita documents such as the importance of good practices in
natural resources development in order to support sustainable
development and for the sake of future generations.

The policy directions in Propenas are derived almost directly
from the 1999 State Guidelines (GBHN) and must be understood in
the context of national development planning documents which are
always broad, rhetorical and standard in nature and designed to
serve its purpose of providing guidance for a more concrete
formulation of development programs, activities, and projects.

Five development programs are indicated in Propenas and
structured correspondingly with the major issues explained in the
earlier paragraph of the chapter.

First, the program for the development of information on
natural resources and environmental management.

This includes proposed activities to improve the availability
of data, the importance of proper valuation of natural resources,
as well as open and easy access to the data.

This program is crucial in the light of the formal
implementation of regional autonomy, starting in January 2001
when many provinces and districts will start to rely heavily on
their natural resources to boost their income. To do so, they
will need good and reliable information on natural resources
especially for production and conservation purposes.

Second, the program for effective management, conservation and
rehabilitation of natural resources to strike a sustainable
balance between exploitation of natural resources for production
use and protection of the environment.

This should be the priority for every provincial authority at
all levels to ensure sustainable development. In fact, similar
programs has been in place for quite a long time but have
performed poorly.

Third, the program to prevent and control environmental
damage. This includes efforts to prevent damage caused by
excessive exploitation; the application of standard environment
quality measures; integration of "cost to the environment" into
production cost of industries; and development of traditional
technology and other environmentally-friendly modes of
production.

Fourth, the program for institutional development and law
enforcement in natural resources management to establish a just,
proper and sustainable usage of natural resources. This includes
proposed activities such as: enactment of a law on natural
resources management; improvement in monitoring, controlling and
surveillance methods, especially in fishery and marine sectors;
development of incentives and sanctions for industries which pose
serious threats to the environment; developing voluntary
mechanisms to promote eco-labeling and ISO-14000; as well as
improving control mechanisms against bio-piracy and illegal sea
fishing by foreigners.

Fifth, the program for improvement of community participation
in natural resources management aimed at facilitating greater
public involvement in planning, formulating, and monitoring
development policy.

This includes capacity building programs for the local
government officials and the community through religion, culture
and adat approach; protection of adat and ulayat (traditional
property) rights; protection of traditional technology; and
utilization of "local wisdom" in managing natural resources.

Propenas was made during a transition period. The period of
Propenas is 2000-2004, but the deliberation and approval process
was delayed until the end of the year 2000. Therefore it is a
supposed five-year development plan left with only four years to
go.

The beginning of the fiscal year was also changed from April
to January. Despite these "oddities", Propenas was written in
much simpler language (and fewer pages) compared to its
predecessor, Repelita. It was intended that the documents should
be easy to read even for the average person.

The government no longer dominates the formulation of the
national development plan but the authority is equally shared
with the DPR. Strong commitment toward a just and sustainable
development in natural resources has been shown in Propenas. But
one big question remains. Can it be implemented? Will it
enforceable?

It all looks good on paper. But why, despite continuous effort
on the part of the government and with increasing expressions of
public concern, does the rate of deforestation still exceed 1.45
million hectares a year?

Any day now, Propenas will be facing the difficult test in
executing its role in providing general guidelines for
Indonesia's development process as it embarks on the regional
autonomy drive.

The writer is a post-graduate student at the Flinders
University in South Australia and a staff member at Bappenas
(National Development Planning Board).